linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH ghak90 V8 07/16] audit: add contid support for signalling the audit daemon

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHC9VhQTsEMcYAF1CSHrrVn07DR450W9j6sFVfKAQZ0VpheOfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Mar 2020 10:26:34 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Cc:     nhorman@...driver.com, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, dhowells@...hat.com,
        linux-audit@...hat.com, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, simo@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
        mpatel@...hat.com, Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak90 V8 07/16] audit: add contid support for signalling
 the audit daemon

On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 9:47 AM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 2020-03-28 23:11, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:02 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > On 2020-03-23 20:16, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 6:03 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > > > On 2020-03-18 18:06, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > > > I hope we can do better than string manipulations in the kernel.  I'd
> > > > > > much rather defer generating the ACID list (if possible), than
> > > > > > generating a list only to keep copying and editing it as the record is
> > > > > > sent.
> > > > >
> > > > > At the moment we are stuck with a string-only format.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, we are.  That is another topic, and another set of changes I've
> > > > been deferring so as to not disrupt the audit container ID work.
> > > >
> > > > I was thinking of what we do inside the kernel between when the record
> > > > triggering event happens and when we actually emit the record to
> > > > userspace.  Perhaps we collect the ACID information while the event is
> > > > occurring, but we defer generating the record until later when we have
> > > > a better understanding of what should be included in the ACID list.
> > > > It is somewhat similar (but obviously different) to what we do for
> > > > PATH records (we collect the pathname info when the path is being
> > > > resolved).
> > >
> > > Ok, now I understand your concern.
> > >
> > > In the case of NETFILTER_PKT records, the CONTAINER_ID record is the
> > > only other possible record and they are generated at the same time with
> > > a local context.
> > >
> > > In the case of any event involving a syscall, that CONTAINER_ID record
> > > is generated at the time of the rest of the event record generation at
> > > syscall exit.
> > >
> > > The others are only generated when needed, such as the sig2 reply.
> > >
> > > We generally just store the contobj pointer until we actually generate
> > > the CONTAINER_ID (or CONTAINER_OP) record.
> >
> > Perhaps I'm remembering your latest spin of these patches incorrectly,
> > but there is still a big gap between when the record is generated and
> > when it is sent up to the audit daemon.  Most importantly in that gap
> > is the whole big queue/multicast/unicast mess.
>
> So you suggest generating that record on the fly once it reaches the end
> of the audit_queue just before being sent?  That sounds...  disruptive.
> Each audit daemon is going to have its own queues, so by the time it
> ends up in a particular queue, we'll already know its scope and would
> have the right list of contids to print in that record.

I'm not suggesting any particular solution, I'm just pointing out a
potential problem.  It isn't clear to me that you've thought about how
we generate a multiple records, each with the correct ACID list
intended for a specific audit daemon, based on a single audit event.
Explain to me how you intend that to work and we are good.  Be
specific because I'm not convinced we are talking on the same plane
here.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com